Edmonton bid for 2017 or 2020 World's Fair - Page 11

Coldrsx · #**201** Posted **Nov 3, 2009, 2:14 PM**

^maybe, maybe not... for i am still on the fence as to whether we should put the amount of resources required into this bid/event.

EdmTrekker · #**202** Posted **Nov 3, 2009, 4:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

^maybe, maybe not... for i am still on the fence as to whether we should put the amount of resources required into this bid/event.

Yes. Also what signals may have Calgary received from Ottawa? We know that GoA was going to support the Edmonton bid...but to my knowledge the Feds have said nothing. It may be that Harper (seated in Calgary as he is) said it is not a big priority for the Feds and that any contribution would be minimal. If there was a whiff of that than the folks South would stop dead in their tracks...leaving us in an expensive next phase. Harper screwed us on the National Portrait Gallery...will this be next?

Some Calgary political blogger will flesh this out...

240glt · #**203** Posted **Nov 3, 2009, 6:30 PM**

I don't think it's that much of a conspiracy... don't forget the only reason Harper is seated in C-town is because it's the only place he could get elected. It's not like he has some sort of deep seated loyalty to that town.

Good news anyways for Edmonton though... that Calgary bid was so underhanded and opportunistic (just like their mayor) it was always going to fail.

frinkprof · #**204** Posted **Nov 3, 2009, 10:09 PM**

I don't think the Calgary 2017 bid was ever realistic, and probably not completely serious either.

Good luck Edmonton.

MalcolmTucker · #**205** Posted **Nov 4, 2009, 2:09 AM**

When are the bids due? Still don't have funding commitments from province beyond the bid phase and feds at all.

Kevin_foster · #**206** Posted **Nov 4, 2009, 3:26 AM**

It is a huge expense... would hate to have other things go unfunded because of this.

Coldrsx · #**207** Posted **Nov 13, 2009, 4:31 PM**

Expo legacy would be twofold: mayor

BY SHEILA PRATT, EDMONTONJOURNAL.COMNOVEMBER 13, 2009 6:02 AMCOMMENTS (18)

STORYPHOTOS ( 2 )

More Images »

Edmonton Expo 2017 logo.
Photograph by: Supplied, edmontonjournal.com
EDMONTON - The city’s plans for Expo 2017 call for a system of water taxis to ferry people across the North Saskatchewan River.

Mayor Stephen Mandel confirmed if Edmonton is chosen as host city the event would be held on a main site on the University of Alberta south campus and would have a second location downtown near Rossdale.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/techn...614/story.html

Hardhatdan · #**208** Posted **Nov 13, 2009, 5:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Expo legacy would be twofold: mayor

BY SHEILA PRATT, EDMONTONJOURNAL.COMNOVEMBER 13, 2009 6:02 AMCOMMENTS (18)

STORYPHOTOS ( 2 )

More Images »

Edmonton Expo 2017 logo.
Photograph by: Supplied, edmontonjournal.com
EDMONTON - The city’s plans for Expo 2017 call for a system of water taxis to ferry people across the North Saskatchewan River.

Mayor Stephen Mandel confirmed if Edmonton is chosen as host city the event would be held on a main site on the University of Alberta south campus and would have a second location downtown near Rossdale.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/techn...614/story.html

I'm kind of really meh on the location...south campus feels like such private, secluded space.
Obviously some of that will change, but it's just not in line with Etown's major nodes or even major attraction (River valley)

Coldrsx · #**209** Posted **Nov 13, 2009, 5:53 PM**

^yup... although pairing it with the university would really put the south campus construction about 10yrs ahead of where it would be otherwise.

Hardhatdan · #**210** Posted **Nov 13, 2009, 5:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

^yup... although pairing it with the university would really put the south campus construction about 10yrs ahead of where it would be otherwise.

Fast tracking it isn't always the best option.
The University has done fine and is doing fine growing "organically" or however you want to put it. Does it really need a massive push or catalyst?
Seems a little boom-bust to me.
That aside you will get a stock of buildings all from one fixed period of time. Instead of the progression of architecture you see at the main campus (not all of it exactly great, but at least representative of all the decades the U of A has been around.

noodlenoodle · #**211** Posted **Nov 13, 2009, 6:01 PM**

University expansion seems to go in waves, and I have no problem with there being a massive influx to start the ball rolling. How many buildings do you need until you can call it a campus with a straight face?

Jasper and one o nin · #**212** Posted **Nov 13, 2009, 6:16 PM**

Its going to be a huge waste of time and money if its going to be on the South Campus because they will never pick our City if that is the case. Shitty location, and breaking into two, makes it even worse.

Coldrsx · #**213** Posted **Nov 13, 2009, 6:20 PM**

^hard to say... it would be more viable, connected er linked by LRT to downtown and the airport (bus). It would allow for 2 themed areas.

Jasper and one o nin · #**214** Posted **Nov 13, 2009, 6:30 PM**

Edmonton's Jewel is the river valley. I really doubt the selection committee will be impressed with a swath of land surrounded by single detached housing and removed from - downtown - the river valley and anywhere else for that matter..
I REALLY think the ideal location is Rossdale. There is the Grandin Government Centre station, the river valley, the leg grounds, downtown. Besides, the residents of Edmonton said rossdale redevelopment should be the city's first priority.
South Campus will not get us EXPO (mark my words) Its a stupid idea
It should all be in one location - and it should be Rossdale
My second choice would be the quarters

kcantor · #**215** Posted **Nov 13, 2009, 7:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jasper and one o nin

Its going to be a huge waste of time and money if its going to be on the South Campus because they will never pick our City if that is the case. Shitty location, and breaking into two, makes it even worse.

although expo 86 in vancouver was "broken into two"...

Jasper and one o nin · #**216** Posted **Nov 13, 2009, 8:11 PM**

It was? Where was the other part? I bet it wasnt in the middle of nowhere in a place that has very little or no context to rest of the City. And whereever it was, it certainly wasn't the main part of expo 86

Jasper and one o nin · #**217** Posted **Nov 13, 2009, 8:14 PM**

Ahhh right, the Canada Place pavillion?

MalcolmTucker · #**218** Posted **Nov 13, 2009, 8:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdnklc

although expo 86 in vancouver was "broken into two"...

Expo 86 was also a much bigger Expo than the one Edmonton is bidding for. 70 hectares vs Edmonton's 25 hectares.

noodlenoodle · #**219** Posted **Nov 13, 2009, 8:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir.Humphrey.Appleby

Expo 86 was also a much bigger Expo than the one Edmonton is bidding for. 70 hectares vs Edmonton's 25 hectares.

I was under the impression that we were competing for a Recognized Exposition rather than the larger Registered Exposition.

Expo 86 was a Recognized Exposition. Montreal 67 was a Registered Exposition.

(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expo_(exhibition))

MalcolmTucker · #**220** Posted **Nov 13, 2009, 8:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by noodlenoodle

I was under the impression that we were competing for a Recognized Exposition rather than the larger Registered Exposition.

Expo 86 was a Recognized Exposition. Montreal 67 was a Registered Exposition.

(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expo_(exhibition))

There used to be no restriction on the size of the smaller expositions. The difference used to be the scope of the theme. That is no longer the case. Expo 86 had a 70 ha footprint, where Edmonton is restricted to a 25 ha one.